THE DIFFERENT USES OF UKEN AND TOA DIALECT ON GAYO LANGUAGE

Hayatullah Hayatullah, Purwanto Siwi


Abstract


The differences between the Uken and Toa dialects are easy to identify in the daily conversations of the speakers. Speakers of these two dialects are still easy to understand each other. The differences occur in several vocal sounds, intonation, some vocabulary, as well as some greetings in everyday dialogue. The aim to be achieved in this research is to find out the differences between the Gayo Uken and Toa dialects. The research method used in this study is a descriptive qualitative method. The differences in conversation between the Uken and Toa people can be seen in terms of their pronunciation when interacting. Besides, there are also slight differences in vocabulary between the two dialects. The differences between the two Gayo dialects occur in the vowel phoneme change and consonant one. The variations of the phonemes used in both dialects stay at the same meaning, but they are pronounced differently. As a result, based on the pronunciation of the Uken and Toa dialects spoken by the community, there are many phoneme variations. Every spoken word produces dissimilarities in vowel phonemes and consonant phonemes.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Ayatrohaedi. (1979). Dialektologi sebuah pengantar. Jakarta IDN: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Baihaqi, A. K. (1981). Bahasa Gayo. Jakarta, IDN: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa.

Bussman, H. (2006). Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics. New York, USA: Routledge.

Harpiandi. (2019). Varietas vokal dalam kelompok penutur bahasa Gayo, Aceh Tengah. Retrieved from https://aceh.tribunnews.com/2019/07/21/varitas-vokal-dalam kelompok-penutur-bahasa-gayo-aceh-tengah.

Holmes, J. (2013). An introduction to sociolinguistics (4th ed.). New York, USA: Routledge.

Hymes, D. (1983). Report from an underdeveloped country: Toward linguistic competence in the United States. In The sociogenesis of language and human conduct (pp. 189-224). Boston, MA: Springer US.

Ibrahim, A. (1995). Sosiolinguistik: Sajian, tujuan, pendekatan, dan problem. Surabaya, IDN: Usaha Nasional.

Junadi, & Nisa. (2021). Analisis idiomatik pada novel Dua Barista karya Najhaty Sharma. Jurnal Peneroka,1(2), 248-258.

Mahsun. (1995). Dialektologi diakronis. Yogyakarta, IDN: Gajah Mada University Press.

Maran, R. R. (2000). Humans and culture in the perspective of basic cultural sciences. Jakarta, IDN: Rineka Cipta.

Mutiaramses, Neviyarni, S., & Murni, I. (2021). Peran guru dalam pengelolaan kelas terhadap hasil belajar siswa sekolah dasar. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 06 (1), 43-48.

Nuryani, N., Isnaniah, S., & Eliya, I. (2021). Sosiolinguistik dalam pengajaran bahasa berbbasis multikultural: Teori dan Praktik Penelitian. Bogor, IDN: In Media.

Robins, R. H. (1992). Some thoughts on the prb-listory of language. Prehistory, History and Historiography of Language, Speech, and Linguistic Theory: Papers in honor of Oswald Szemerényi I, 64, 39.

Rohim, R., & Ganestr. (2021). Konsep asesmen kompetensi minimum untuk meningkatkan kemampuan literasi numerasi siswa sekolah dasar. Jurnal Varidika, 33(1), 54-62.

Spolsky, B. (1998). Sociolinguistics (Vol. 1). Oxford, UK: Oxford university press.

Sugiyono. (2013). Metode penelitian pendidikan (pendekatan kualitatif dan r & d). Bandung, IDN: Alfabeta.

Sukiman. (2015). Pengaruh modernisasi terhadap tradisi pendidikan anak dalam masyarakat suku Gayo. El Harakah, 17(2).

Syafyahya, Aslind, and Leni. (2010). Pengantar sosiolinguistik. Bandung, IDN: PT Refika Aditama.

Utami, R. S., & Butar-Butar, C. (2023). Analisis kontrastif dialek Gayo Uken dan Toa. Sintaks: Jurnal Bahasa & Sastra Indonesia, 3(1), 30-38.

Zulaeha, I. (2010). Dialektologi: Dialek geografi & dialek sosial. Yogyakarta, IDN: Graha Ilmu.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.30743/jol.v6i2.10103

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.